[Talk-GB] Tagging of private parking in gardens

[Donald Noble]

Thanks for the thoughts folks. Sorry I should have been clearer in my
original message that I agree the acces=private tag is required, but I was
wondering if the tagging should also be updated as well before I changed
anything.

I can understand Frederik's point about DWG complaints, as the faded P is
also used where access is for customers, which is somewhat different to a
private driveway. As Mark notes, this can lead to a very cluttered map
(although that is not necessarily a reason not to map).

I like Robert's suggestion of some other tagging for private driveways,
although assume that would require some form of consensus. This was sort of
what I was thinking in my original message.

Jerry, the police call box is currently only a frame, not sure if it is
being refurbished. I'm also not sure if there are restrictions on the
Dorset Place parking, will check next time I'm passing.

Cheers, Donald

On Tue, 3 Jan 2023 at 13:53, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:

> On 03.01.23 14:35, Robert Skedgell wrote:
> > As well as Mateusz's suggestion of ensuring that it is access=private, a
> > new tag like parking=driveway rather than parking=surface might help
> > (preferably not rendered with a P by OSM Carto).
>
> Frequent source of complaints to DWG - even when mapped access=private,
> property owners will still often object to the "P" shown on the map.
> Some will relent when we point out the much stronger blue "P" on a
> public car park, but others - probably not unreasonably - fear that map
> users will mistake this for a public space.
>
>
On Tue, 3 Jan 2023 at 14:37, Mark Goodge <mark at good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:

> My personal opinion, FWIW, is that we shouldn't map parking spaces that
> are merely the forecourt or back yard of an individual private
> residential dwelling. Otherwise, if done consistently it's going to make
> the average suburban street look incredibly cluttered - most of the
> common renders will be littered with densely packed Ps all over the
> place in urban areas, and, while we don't map for the render, that kind
> of tag is pretty useless for data consumers as well. It's also
> meaningless for most residential properties, because, although parking
> may well be the most common use, almost all residential curtilages are
> multi-purpose.
>
> I think it is useful, though, to map shared parking in residential areas
> (eg, parking for an apartment block), and also parking within the
> curtilage of a commercial property. In these cases, though, it does need
> to be tagged as private.



On Tue, 3 Jan 2023 at 13:27, SK53 <sk53.osm at gmail.com> wrote:

> The one on Merchiston Avenue has been tagged as private since it was the
> amenity=parking was added by eric_ (a lead in the MESH project). Very nice old
> police box
> <https://canmore.org.uk/site/85649/edinburgh-merchiston-avenue-police-call-box> (tardis)
> just outside. On Bing Streetview imagery the access to the parking is not
> restricted by a gate. Looks to be mapped accurately.
>
> As others have said, the other one is probably a car park for guests of
> the guest house and could do with an appropriate access tag. I've certainly
> stayed in guest houses in this area with parking round the back (and also
> in Corstorphine). These may be some of the closest places to the city
> centre which provide such a facility.
>
> However, there are a number of other amenity=parking in this area which I
> think deserve more attention than these two. For instance, on Dorset Place
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/503332708> there are a number of car
> parks which look like private parking for residents of the apartments
> there. These should probably be tagged as for Abbotsford Court
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/189682569/history> up the hill (a
> place friends used to have a flat).
>
> I think it's worth reviewing access tags, but would not remove ones
> already mapped.
>
> Jerry
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20230103/3bf75527/attachment.htm>